Pages

Wednesday, 7 September 2016

Theatre review: The Inn at Lydda

Although the initial description didn't instantly grab me, I eventually booked for
The Inn at Lydda based on the cast - not only a strong cast but one largely
made up of faces familiar to the Globe, suggesting that the new regime doesn't
entirely want to burn bridges with the old one (something tricky to do anyway
in the Swanamaker, where Dominic Dromgoole's face is part of the decor.) John
Wolfson's play, getting a short run in the indoor playhouse, imagines a meeting in
ancient Judea: The Emperor Tiberius Caesar (Stephen Boxer) is sick and dying, but
has heard of a miracle worker in a distant part of his empire, who he's sure can
cure him. Unfortunately by the time he and his entourage make it to Jerusalem, Jesus
of Nazareth has been crucified by Rome's own representatives. But unlike the last version of the story we saw on a London stage, this one is based on Christian
apocrypha, so the story doesn't end there.

In fact Jesus (Samuel Collings) has just returned from the dead, and is preparing to
reveal himself to his disciples when he encounters a different set of figures from
his past.

Its subject matter may seem esoteric but The Inn at Lydda is essentially a
rather odd comedy that opens with the Three Wise Men, returned to see the climax of
a story they were at the start of. They're there to try and convince Jesus to give
Caesar a chance, while Caspar (Joseph Marcell) also tries - in vain, inevitably - to
prepare Caesar for the fact that the healer he seeks isn't going to be what he
expects. But they're also there to do some in-jokes about calendars, and the fact
that they're going to need some kind of standard starting point to count years from.
A couple of these kinds of gag aren't too bad but Wolfson does pile on the little
anachronisms and winks to the audience, and an early problem I had with the play is
that it does feel quite pleased with itself pretty quickly.

This is a play about power and when and how to use it, but it's also about madness:
Tiberius' illness manifests itself in bouts of insanity (we first meet him speaking
to his generals via a puppet beaver) and his nominated successor is Caligula, so
things are only going to get madder at the top*. Also running around the mountains
is John (Matthew Romain,) a follower of Jesus who chews on a hallucinogenic root and
raves about Rome as an evil beast (the suggestion seems to be that this is the John
of Revelation rather than the Apostle.)

It's not surprising to see Philip Cumbus be the one to steal a show, something he
does here in what is little more than a cameo as his scenery-chewing Caligula
doesn't actually turn up until the second act; but he explodes onto and around the
stage, pursuing his lover Mnester (Chris Lew Kum Hoi) in a fit of jealousy, in
between proclamations of his own divinity. In a show where the anachronistic comedy
doesn't always come off, Cumbus not only gets away with but makes a highlight of
Caligula trying to seduce the half-naked John, complete with providing his own disco
beat (and particularly excited about the fact that John's covered in mud, because he
likes his boys dirty.)

So something of a curate's egg all in all, I can't say it's not an enjoyable evening
(and not just because of the men in skimpy togas) but the play feels fragmented and
seriously flawed, right up to when it finally gets to the main event of Jesus and
Caesar meeting, which feels abrupt and dry after the frantic nature of what's gone
before (while the fact that it's played out as Life of Brian-lite until this
point means it's lost any chance of being taken seriously.) The fact that for the
most part the evening succeeds is down to director Andy Jordan and his cast, who
make the most of a wobbly script.

The Inn at Lydda by John Wolfson is booking until the 17th of September at the Sam
Wanamaker Playhouse.

Running time: 2 hours 10 minutes including interval.

Photo credit: Marc Brenner.

*I saw this on Press Night so there were a lot of actors in the audience; including
Matthew Needham, who I can only imagine was furious that there was a play
with not one but two mad Roman Emperors and he wasn't cast in it.